Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article raises issues related to written fixation of the oral Mennonite language called Plautdietsch. The Mennonites – members of one of the Protestant churches, established first in Holland and northern Germany – changed their place of residence over the centuries. The Mennonite language emerged in Prussia and later in Ukraine, where their large colonies had lived. Being a striking feature of this specific ethno-confessional community, Plautdietsch was and still is used almost exclusively in oral communication and does not have any established written standard. The phonology of Plautdietsch may be identified, in general, as Low German, although there is a number of significant phonological features are not characteristic of Low German area. Now the Plautdietsch native speakers live all over the world: in Canada, Germany, Russia, in particular, in Siberia, where their own, yet unstable, written standard of the language is being formed. One of the main problems concerning its fixation is caused by the complicated vocalism and high instability observed in the pronunciation of many vowels and diphthongs, the main source of difficulties preventing elaboration of the means for writing. In this paper, we focus on these unstable features of the vocal system. It provides a brief overview of currently available written samples of Plautdietsch, produced in Canada, Germany, and Russia. Some of them are based on the Latin alphabet and norms of the German spelling. Others, on the contrary, depart from it, using specific letter combinations, unknown earlier, introducing geminates (double consonants), refusing to spell nouns with a capital letter or to use umlauts (for technical convenience). Developments and tentative approaches of some Germanists from Russia who introduced their own ways of writing Plautdietsch in their research papers are presented. As an illustration, the samples of such a graphic system, elaborated by the linguist from Novosibirsk I. A. Kanakin (1940–2018), are given. They were not published and are kept in the personal archive of the author of the article. Our own principle of writing is presented too, and this as a part of the project implementation – compiling and publishing a small handbook for reading in this language, which is addressed to children, whose native language is Plautdietsch and who study literary German at school. Taking this into account, the most appropriate ad-hoc solution seems to use a form of writing that is close to German spelling and is accepted today in Germany.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.005 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".